3.1 Cert not accepted

[STEPSWIFT]

Hi All,

We have client that does not want to accept EN10201 type 3.1 cert, as they have requested that we need to present certificate of the material origin as well.

the above is not easy especially to supply especially when this us for Flanges and other fittings as the original materials certs are seldom produced.

can any one advise if they have had this same problem , and how to overcome.

 

For pressure equipment I would accept nothing less than actual CMTRs, including mill of origin. This is the standard expectation as far as I know. These days I would actively exclude China sourcing; not for political reasons but because Petroleum.
Always crucial to spell these things out in the PO to avoid later confusion and debates.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

 

[SJones]

The product manufacturer, i.e. flange manufacturer, fitting manufacturer, etc, has to be able to do this:

"It shall be permissible for the manufacturer to transfer on to the inspection certificate 3.1 relevant test results
obtained by specific inspection on primary or incoming products he uses, provided that the manufacturer operates
traceability procedures and can provide the corresponding inspection documents required."

It is assumed that you are having difficulties with items supplied by stockists. Good stockists maintain traceability back to the starting material with the use of the "certified true copy" system of inspection documents where everyone in the chain (supposedly) verifies copies that they make back to the original document.

Select your stockist and specify the documentation requirements accordingly.

Steve Jones
Corrosion Management Consultant

http://www.linkedin.com/in/drstevejones

All answers are personal opinions only and are in no way connected with any employer.

 

[weldstan]

While stockists can be a problem re traceability, so can manufacturers, especially valve manufacturers. We had full material traceability on a North Sea gas processing plant project but the manufactures did not really maintain such, although it may have been the middleman sales agent who did not clearly detail the requirements to the valve manufacturers. After a thorough audit, we required the middleman to remake all valves.

In another case all of the valve body forgings were marked 350-LF2 but there was reason to suspect proper heat treatment and impact test data reported. After renormalizing and retesting 3000 valve bodies, one of the 6 heats representing about 500 valve bodies was found to be A-105 not 350-LF2.

In both of the above cases, all materials were manufactured in Italy by reputable manufacturers.

When the Owner requires such stringent traceability, purchasing documents and purchaser's inspection requirements must be fully detailed to the manufacturer and the added costs relayed to the Owner.